Wheat, Barley, and Oat Performance Tests in Tennessee
|
|
- Angelina Mosley
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Wheat, Barley, and Oat Performance Tests in Tennessee 2004 Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Richard D. Johnson, Research Associate, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Robert C. Williams, Jr. Extension Area Specialist, Grain Crops Chism Craig, Extension Specialist, Cotton & Small Grains Agronomic Crop Variety Testing and Demonstrations Department of Plant Sciences University of Tennessee Knoxville Telephone: (865) FAX: (865) Variety test results are posted on UT s website at: 1
2 Acknowledgments This research was funded by the Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station and the Tennessee Cooperative Extension Service with partial funding from participating companies. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the following individuals in conducting these experiments: Dept. of Plant Sciences Dr. Dennis West, Professor and Grains Breeder Experiment Stations: Knoxville Experiment Station, Knoxville Dr. John Hodges, Superintendent Mr. Bobby McKee, Sr. Farm Crew Leader Mr. Craig Miller, Research Assistant Highland Rim Experiment Station, Springfield Dr. Barry Sims, Superintendent Mr. William Pitt, Research Associate Middle Tennessee Experiment Station, Spring Hill Dr. Dennis Onks, Superintendent Mr. Roy Thompson, Research Associate Milan Experiment Station, Milan Dr. Blake Brown, Superintendent Mr. Jason Williams, Research Associate Mr. James McClure, Research Associate West Tennessee Experiment Station, Jackson Dr. Robert Hayes, Superintendent Mr. Gordon Percell, Research Associate Ames Plantation, Grand Junction Dr. Rick Carlisle, Superintendent Mr. Marshall Smith, Research Associate 2
3 County Standard Wheat Test Coordinator: Mr. Robert C. Williams, Jr., Extension Area Specialist, Grain Crops Dyer County Mr. Tim Campbell, Extension Director George and Jerry Pate Hollingsworth Farm Gibson County Mr. Philip Shelby, Extension Director Charles and Andy King Farm Henry County Mr. Ken Goddard, Extension Director Edwin Ables Farm Lake County Mr. Greg Allen, Extension Director John Dickey Farm Lauderdale Mr. Jerry Parker, Extension Director Peyton and Mathis Farm Obion County Mr. Tim Smith, Extension Director William and Bill Thompson Farm Weakley County Mr. Jeff Lannom, Extension Director David and John Waterfield Farm Madison County (West Tennessee Experiment Station) Dr. Chism Craig, Extension Specialist, Cotton & Small Grains, Dept. of Plant Sciences Moore County Mr. Larry Moorehead, Extension Director Jerry Ray Farm Fulton, KY Mr. Ben Mullins Johnson Linder Farm 3
4 Table of Contents General Information 6 Interpretation of data.. 6 List of Tables Wheat Results Table 1. Location information from experiment stations where the wheat variety tests were conducted in Table 2. Mean yields of 78 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during Table 3. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 78 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during Table 4. Yields of 18 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated in ten County Standard Tests in Tennessee during Table 5. Yields, moistures, and test weights of 14 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated in both the County Standard Tests (n=10) and Experiment Station Tests (n=6) in Tennessee during Table 6. Mean yields of 31 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations (n=12) in Tennessee for two years Table 7. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 31 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations (n=12) in Tennessee for two years Table 8. Mean yields of 22 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations (n=18) in Tennessee for three years Table 9. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 22 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations (n=18) in Tennessee for three years Wheat Management Study Table 10. Management regimes used for low, medium and high levels of input for 12 winter wheat varieties tested at Jackson, TN during the growing season Table 11. Yield of 12 wheat varieties grown under three management regimes, Jackson, TN, Table 12. Comparison of management regimes for wheat yield, test weight, and harvest moisture averaged across 12 varieties, Jackson, TN, Barley Results Table 13. Location information from experiment stations where the barley variety tests were conducted in Table 14. Mean yields of five six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during Table 15. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of five six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during Table 16. Mean yields of five six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at five locations (n=10) in Tennessee for two years, Table 17. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of five six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at five locations (n=10) in Tennessee for two years
5 Table 18. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of three six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at four locations (n=12) in Tennessee for three years, Oat Results Table 19. Mean yields, agronomic characteristics and winter hardiness ratings of 21 oat breeding lines evaluated at Jackson, Tennessee in Table 20. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 21 oat breeding lines evaluated at Knoxville, Tennessee in
6 General Information Experiment Station Tests: The 2004 variety performance tests were conducted on 78 soft, red winter wheat varieties in each of the physiographic regions of the state. Tests were conducted at the Ames Plantation (Grand Junction) and at the Highland Rim (Springfield), Knox (Knoxville), Middle TN (Spring Hill), Milan (Milan), and West TN (Jackson) Agricultural Experiment Stations. All varieties were seeded at rates from seed per square foot (Table 1). Plots were seeded with drills using inch row spacings. The plot size was six, seven or ten rows, 25 to 30 feet in length depending on location equipment. Plots were replicated three times at each location. Seed of all varieties were treated with a fungicide. County Standard Tests: The Standard Wheat Test was conducted on 18 soft, red winter wheat varieties in 9 counties in West Tennessee (Dyer, Gibson, Henry, Lake, Lauderdale, Moore, Obion, Weakley, and Madison) and one county in western Kentucky (Fulton). Each variety was evaluated in a large strip-plot at each location, thus each county test was considered as one replication of the test in calculating the overall average yield and in conducting the statistical analysis to determine significant differences. At each location, plots were planted, sprayed, fertilized, and harvested with the equipment used by the cooperating producer in his farming operation. The width and length of strip-plots were different in each county; however, within a location in a county, the strips were trimmed on the ends so that the lengths were the same for each variety, or if the lengths were different then the harvested length was measured for each variety and appropriate harvested area adjustments were made to determine the yield per acre. Growing Season: The growing season began with favorable moisture and temperature conditions during the fall planting season. The winter temperatures were relatively mild with very little freezing damage to the plants. The spring season was wet and unseasonably warm during most of March, April and May. Rains during June made harvest difficult. The warm humid conditions contributed to disease pressure (e.g. take-all and glume blotch); however yield losses due to diseases in the tests were not high. Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus (BYDV) was present in the tests at all locations, but the most severe symptoms were present in the Knoxville location test. Ratings were taken on BYDV at the Knoxville location, but none of the other test locations had enough visible symptoms to rate differences among varieties. Interpretation of Data The tables on the following pages have been prepared with the entries listed in order of performance, the highest-yielding entry being listed first. All yields presented have been adjusted to 13.5% moisture. At the bottom of the tables, LSD values stand for Least Significant Difference. The mean yields of any two varieties being compared must differ by at least the LSD amount shown to be considered different in yielding ability at the 5% level of probability of significance. For example, given that the LSD for a test is 8.0 bu/a and the mean yield of Variety A was 50 bu/a and the mean yield of Variety B was 55 bu/a, then the two varieties are not statistically different in yield because the difference of 5 bu/a is less than the minimum of 8 bu/a required for them to be significant. Similarly, if the average yield of Variety C was 63 bu/a then it is significantly higher yielding than both Variety B (63-55 = 8 bu/a = 6
7 LSD of 8) and Variety A (63-50 = 13 bu/a > LSD of 8). Also, the coefficient of variation (C.V.) values are shown at the bottom of each table. This value is a measure of the error variability found within each experiment. It is the percentage that the square root of error mean square is of the overall test mean yield at that location. For example, a C.V. of 10% indicates that the size of the error variation is about 10% of the size of the test mean. Similarly, a C.V. of 30% indicates that the size of the error variation is nearly one-third as large as the test mean. A goal in conducting each yield test is to keep the C.V. as low as possible, preferably below 20% Wheat Results Yield and Agronomic Traits: During 2004, 78 wheat varieties were evaluated in six experiment station tests, and 18 varieties were evaluated in eight county standard tests. Fourteen of the varieties were common to both the experiment station and the county tests. Twelve companies and seven universities entered varieties into the tests this year. Thirty-one of the 78 varieties have been evaluated for two years ( ) and 22 of the 78 have been evaluated for three years ( ). The average yield of the 71 non-insecticide treated varieties in the experiment station tests was 69 bu/a (range from 52 to 85 bu/a, Table 2). The average yield of the seven insecticide treated varieties in the experiment station tests was 75 bu/a with individual varieties ranging from 65 to 86 bu/a. The varieties ranged in maturity from 220 to 225 days after planting (DAP) with most of the varieties clustering around 222. The test weight scores ranged from the lowto mid-fifties with the range being 51.6 to 57.8 lbs/bu (Table 3). The average yield of the 15 non-insecticide treated varieties in the county tests was 56.1 bu/a with individual varieties ranging from 51.0 to 69.1 bu/a. The average yield of the three insecticide treated varieties in the county tests was 62.9 bu/a with individual varieties ranging from 61.2 to 65.1 bu/a. The test weight values ranged from 52.8 to 56.4 lbs/bu (Table 4). As evidenced by the two years of data presented in Table 6, excellent choices are available of wheat varieties developed by companies as well as universities. Table 1. Location information from experiment stations where the wheat variety tests were conducted in Planting Harvest Seeding Experiment Station Location Date Date Rate Soil Type Ames Plantation Grand Junction 10/30/2003 6/9/ /ft 2 Lexington Silt Loam Highland Rim Springfield 10/21/2003 6/21/ /ft 2 Dickson Silt Loam Knoxville Knoxville 10/17/2003 6/11/ /ft 2 Sequoia Silty Clay Loam Milan Milan 10/7/2003 6/23/ /ft 2 Grenada Silt Loam Middle Tennessee Spring Hill 11/4/2003 6/9/ /ft 2 Maury Silt Loam West Tennessee Jackson 10/24/2003 6/10/ /ft 2 Lexington Silt Loam 7
8 Table 2. Mean yields of 78 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during Avg. Yield ± Std Err. Spring Brand Variety (n=6) Knoxville Springfield Hill Jackson Milan Ames bu/a Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Pioneer 25R78 79 ± Delta King DK XTJ ± FFR ± Pioneer 26R15 76 ± Delta King DK ± VA Roane 75 ± Armor AXR ± Pioneer 26R12 74 ± Delta Grow ± Renwood 3706 (VA98W-706) 74 ± Progeny ± Delta King DK XTJ ± Delta King DK ± Armor ± Renwood ± Progeny ± Progeny ± AR Pat 72 ± Delta Grow ± Pioneer 25R49 72 ± NK Brand Coker 9312 (B961416) 72 ± FFR ± Delta King DK XTJ ± NK Brand Coker ± Progeny ± VA McCormick 70 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) V ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) V ± AgriPro Savage 70 ± NK Brand B ± Delta Grow ± Agripro Beretta 70 ± Pioneer 25R37 70 ± TN Exp TN ± Delta King DK XTJ ± Delta King DK XTJ ± NK Brand Coker ± MD MV ± AR Sabbe 69 ± AgriPro Cooper (M ) 68 ± Pioneer 26R58 68 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) Tribute 68 ± MO Truman 68 ± AgriPro Benton (M ) 68 ± Progeny ± AgriPro L96* ± OH Bravo 67 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) V ± Progeny ± (continued) 8
9 Table 2. Mean yields of 78 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during (continued) Avg. Yield ± Std Err. Spring Brand Variety (n=6) Knoxville Springfield Hill Jackson Milan Ames bu/a VA Jackson 67 ± Delta King DK 1551w 67 ± MD MD ± Armor AXR ± FFR ± FFR ± AR Exp. AR ± VA Exp. 97W ± VA Sisson 65 ± Delta King DK XTJ ± FFR ± MD MD ± Armor AXR ± AR Exp. AR ± Delta King DK XTJ ± GA Exp E17 61 ± Delta King DK ± OH Hopewell 60 ± OH Daisy 55 ± NK Brand Coker 9375 (B960457) 52 ± Average (bu/a) Varieties* -- Seed Treated with Gaucho Systemic Insecticide USG ± USG ± USG ± USG Exp ± USG ± USG ± USG Exp ± Average (bu/a) L.S.D..05 (bu/a) C.V. (%) All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments * Tested in the same trial with untreated varieties 9
10 Table 3. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 78 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during Avg. Yield Test BYD ± Std Err. Moisture Weight Heading Maturity Height Lodging Virus Brand Variety (n=6) (n=6) (n=3) (n=1) (n=5) (n=6) (n=1) (n=1) bu/a % lbs/bu DAP DAP in. Score Score Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Pioneer 25R78 79 ± Delta King DK XTJ ± FFR ± Pioneer 26R15 76 ± Delta King DK ± VA Roane 75 ± Armor AXR ± Pioneer 26R12 74 ± Delta Grow ± Renwood 3706 (VA98W-706) 74 ± Progeny ± Delta King DK XTJ ± Delta King DK ± Armor ± Renwood ± Progeny ± Progeny ± AR Pat 72 ± Delta Grow ± Pioneer 25R49 72 ± NK Brand Coker 9312 (B961416) 72 ± FFR ± Delta King DK XTJ ± NK Brand Coker ± Progeny ± VA McCormick 70 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) V ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) V ± AgriPro Savage 70 ± NK Brand B ± Delta Grow ± Agripro Beretta 70 ± Pioneer 25R37 70 ± TN Exp TN ± Delta King DK XTJ ± Delta King DK XTJ ± NK Brand Coker ± MD MV ± AR Sabbe 69 ± AgriPro Cooper (M ) 68 ± Pioneer 26R58 68 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) Tribute 68 ± MO Truman 68 ± AgriPro Benton (M ) 68 ± Progeny ± AgriPro L96* ± OH Bravo 67 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) V ± Progeny ± (continued) 10
11 Table 3. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 78 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during (continued) Avg. Yield Test BYD ± Std Err. Moisture Weight Heading Maturity Height Lodging Virus Brand Variety (n=6) (n=6) (n=2) (n=1) (n=5) (n=6) (n=1) (n=1) bu/a % lbs/bu DAP DAP in. Score Score VA Jackson 67 ± Delta King DK 1551w 67 ± MD MD ± Armor AXR ± FFR ± FFR ± AR Exp. AR ± VA Exp. 97W ± VA Sisson 65 ± Delta King DK XTJ ± FFR ± MD MD ± Armor AXR ± AR Exp. AR ± Delta King DK XTJ ± GA Exp E17 61 ± Delta King DK ± OH Hopewell 60 ± OH Daisy 55 ± NK Brand Coker 9375 (B960457) 52 ± Varieties* -- Seed Treated with Gaucho Systemic Insecticide USG ± USG ± USG ± USG Exp ± USG ± USG ± USG Exp ± All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments Official test weight of No. 2 wheat = 58 lbs/bu; average of Knoxville and Ames Plantation. * Tested in the same trial with untreated varieties Heading & Maturity (DAP) = Days after planting Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle 45. BYD = Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus - 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants infected; 2.5 = ~50% of plants infected; 5 = 95+% of plants infected; BYD notes taken at the Knoxville location. 11
12 Table 4. Yields of 18 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated in 10 County Standard Tests in Tennessee and Kentucky during Avg. Test KY WTES MS Brand/Variety Yield Moisture Weight Dyer Fulton Gibson Henry Lake Lauderdale Moore Obion Weakley Madison bu/a % lbs/bu bu/a A FFR AB Croplan 554W ABC *Pioneer 25R ABC *'FFR BCD Vigoro "Tribute" BCD Pioneer 25R BCD Croplan 514W BCD FFR BCD Pioneer 25R BCD FFR CDE Pioneer 25R CDE Vigoro DE Pioneer E AgriPro"Savage" E Delta King 1551W Average Varieties* -- Seed Treated with Gaucho Systemic Insecticide A USG A *USG AB *USG Average Yields have been adjusted to 13.5% moisture. Each variety was evaluated in a large strip-plot at each location, thus each county test was considered as one replication of the test in calculating the average yield and in conducting the statistical analysis to determine significant differences (MS). Official test weight of No. 2 wheat = 58 lbs/bu. * Tested in the same trial with untreated varieties MS = Varieties that have any MS letter in common are not statistically different in yield at the 5% level of probability. Varieties denoted with an asterisk (*) were in the top performing group for two years. WTES = West Tennessee Experiment Station Data provided by Robert C. Williams, Ext. Area Specialist, Grain Crops, and extension agents in counties shown above. 12
13 Table 5. Yields, moistures, and test weights of 14 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated in both the County Standard Tests (n=10) and Experiment Station Tests (n=6) in Tennessee during County Standard Tests Experiment Station Tests Avg. Avg. Brand Variety Yield Moisture Test Weight Yield Moisture Test Weight bu/a % lbs/bu bu/a % lbs/bu FFR Pioneer 25R FFR Royster Clark (Vigoro) Tribute Pioneer 25R FFR FFR Pioneer 25R Royster Clark (Vigoro) V AgriPro Savage Delta King DK 1551w Average Varieties* -- Seed Treated with Gaucho Systemic Insecticide USG USG USG Average All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. Official test weight of No. 2 wheat = 58 lbs/bu. * Tested in the same trial with untreated varieties 13
14 Table 6. Mean yields of 31 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations (n=12) in Tennessee for two years Avg. Yield ± Std Err. Spring Brand Variety (n=12) Knoxville Springfield Hill Jackson Milan Ames bu/a Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Pioneer 25R78 69 ± NK Brand Coker ± AR Pat 67 ± Pioneer 25R37 66 ± Progeny ± Delta King DK ± Delta King DK ± VA McCormick 65 ± VA Roane 65 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) Tribute 65 ± Renwood 3706 (VA98W-706) 64 ± NK Brand Coker ± Pioneer 26R58 63 ± Progeny ± FFR ± AgriPro Savage 63 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) V ± FFR ± OH Bravo 62 ± AgriPro Benton (M ) 61 ± AR Sabbe 60 ± VA Jackson 60 ± Progeny ± VA Sisson 59 ± FFR ± Delta King DK 1551w 58 ± Delta King DK ± NK Brand Coker 9375 (B960457) 55 ± OH Daisy 52 ± Average (bu/a) L.S.D..05 (bu/a) C.V. (%) All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments 14
15 Table 7. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 31 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations (n=12) in Tennessee for two years Avg. Yield Test BYD ± Std Err. Moisture Weight Heading Maturity Height Lodging Virus Brand Variety (n=12) (n=12) (n=8) (n=3) (n=10) (n=12) (n=3) (n=1) bu/a % lbs/bu DAP DAP in. Score Score Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Pioneer 25R78 69 ± NK Brand Coker ± AR Pat 67 ± Pioneer 25R37 66 ± Progeny ± Delta King DK ± Delta King DK ± VA McCormick 65 ± VA Roane 65 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) Tribute 65 ± Renwood 3706 (VA98W-706) 64 ± NK Brand Coker ± Pioneer 26R58 63 ± Progeny ± FFR ± AgriPro Savage 63 ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) V ± FFR ± OH Bravo 62 ± AgriPro Benton (M ) 61 ± AR Sabbe 60 ± VA Jackson 60 ± Progeny ± VA Sisson 59 ± FFR ± Delta King DK 1551w 58 ± Delta King DK ± NK Brand Coker 9375 (B960457) 55 ± OH Daisy 52 ± All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments Official test weight of No. 2 wheat = 58 lbs/bu. Heading & Maturity (DAP) = Days after planting Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle 45. BYD = Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus - 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants infected; 2.5 = ~50% of plants infected; 5 = 95+% of plants infected. BYD notes taken at the Knoxville location in
16 Table 8. Mean yields of 22 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations (n=18) in Tennessee for three years Avg. Yield ± Std Err. Spring Brand Variety (n=18) Knoxville Springfield Hill Jackson Milan Ames bu/a Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Pioneer 25R78 67 ± AR Pat 63 ± AgriPro Savage 63 ± Delta King DK ± Pioneer 25R37 63 ± VA McCormick 62 ± NK Brand Coker ± NK Brand Coker ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) Tribute 62 ± VA Roane 62 ± FFR ± OH Bravo 60 ± FFR ± Delta King DK ± Progeny ± AR Sabbe 57 ± VA Sisson 57 ± VA Jackson 57 ± Delta King DK 1551w 55 ± FFR ± Delta King DK Average (bu/a) L.S.D..05 (bu/a) C.V. (%) All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments (.) Indicates that the variety was not tested in that location over the three year period. 16
17 Table 9. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 22 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated at six locations (n=18) in Tennessee for three years Avg. Yield Test BYD ± Std Err. Moisture Weight Heading Maturity Height Lodging Virus Septoria Rust Brand Variety (n=18) (n=18) (n=14) (n=5) (n=15) (n=18) (n=4) (n=2) (n=1) (n=1) bu/a % lbs/bu DAP DAP in. Score Score Score Score Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Pioneer 25R78 67 ± AR Pat 63 ± AgriPro Savage 63 ± Delta King DK ± Pioneer 25R37 63 ± VA McCormick 62 ± NK Brand Coker ± NK Brand Coker ± Royster Clark (Vigoro) Tribute 62 ± VA Roane 62 ± FFR ± OH Bravo 60 ± FFR ± Delta King DK ± Progeny ± AR Sabbe 57 ± VA Sisson 57 ± VA Jackson 57 ± Delta King DK 1551w 55 ± FFR ± Delta King DK All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments Official test weight of No. 2 wheat = 58 lbs/bu. (.) Indicates that the variety was not tested in all locations over the three year period. Heading & Maturity (DAP) = Days after planting Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle 45. BYD (Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus), Septoria, Rust, Stripe Rust, Take All - 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants infected; 2.5 = ~50% of plants infected; 5 = 95+% of plants infected. BYD notes taken atknoxville 2004 and Jackson Septoria and Rust notes taken at Jackson
18 Wheat Management Study Table 10. Management regimes used for low, medium and high levels of input for 12 winter wheat varieties tested at Jackson, TN during the growing season. Management Regime Planting Date Harvest Date Soil Type Tillage Seeding Rate Seed Treatment Herbicide Insecticide Fungicide Fertility/Timing Low 11/5/2004 6/11/2004 Medium 11/5/2004 6/11/2004 High 11/5/2004 6/11/2004 Grenada Silt Loam No-Till 1.2 Million None None None None Grenada Silt Loam No-Till 1.2 Million None Grenada Silt Loam No-Till 1.6 Million Gaucho 0.5 oz Harmony Extra 3/4/ oz Harmony Extra + 3 oz Clarity 3/4/04 followed by 2 pt. Hoelon 3/17/04 None None 60 lbs. N applied 3/3/ oz Headline at 90 lbs. N applied F /3/ oz Quilt at F lbs. N applied Preplant; 45 lbs. N applied 2/18/2004;45 lbs. N applied 3/3/2004 Table 11. Yield of 12 wheat varieties grown under three management regimes, Jackson, TN, Variety Average Yield Low Medium High Test Weight Harvest Moisture bu/acre bu/acre bu/acre bu/acre lbs./bu % P25R P25R USG P25R P25R CL P FFR DK Savage Tribute FFR Mean LSD (0.05) CV (%) Pr>F Variety < < Rep < Management < < Variety X Management Table 12. Comparison of management regimes for wheat yield, test weight and harvest moisture averaged across 12 varieties, Jackson, TN, Management Regime Yield Test Weight bu/acre lbs./bu % Low Medium High Mean LSD (0.05) Harvest Moisture 18
19 Barley Results Five released varieties of barley were tested during 2004 at six experiment stations representing the different physiographic regions of Tennessee. Three released varieties (Callao, Nomini, and Price) have been evaluated for three years. All of the varieties evaluated in these tests were developed in the Barley Breeding Program at Virginia Tech. One of the varieties, Doyce (formerly tested as VA00H-137), is a hull-less type. The average yield of the five entries across the five locations was 82 bu/a, with a range from 70 to 104 bu/a. The highest yields were obtained at Knoxville where the location mean of the five entries was 116 bu/a and the highest variety yield was 131 bu/a (Thoroughbred). The maturity of the barley entries ranged from 215 to 218 DAP. The barley varieties adapted to Tennessee generally mature about a week to ten days earlier than adapted wheat varieties. The test weights of the barley entries ranged from 42.1 to 52.1 lbs/bu, with most of the entries being 44 lbs/bu. Doyce has a higher test weight of 52.1 due to the hull-less nature of its grain. The official test weight for barley is 48 lbs/bu compared to 58 lbs/bu for wheat. Table 13. Location information from experiment stations where the barley variety tests were conducted in Planting Harvest Seeding Experiment Station Location Date Date Rate Soil Type Ames Plantation Grand Junction 10/30/2003 6/9/ /ft 2 Lexington Silt Loam Highland Rim Springfield 10/21/2003 6/7/ /ft 2 Dickson Silt Loam Knoxville Knoxville 10/17/2003 6/2/ /ft 2 Sequoia Silty Clay Loam Milan Milan 10/7/2003 6/17/ /ft 2 Grenada Silt Loam Middle Tennessee Spring Hill 11/4/2003 6/9/ /ft 2 Maury Silt Loam West Tennessee Jackson 10/24/2003 6/8/ /ft 2 Lexington Silt Loam 19
20 Table 14. Mean yields of five six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during Avg. Yield ± Std Err. Spring Brand Variety (n=6) Knoxville Springfield Hill Jackson Milan Ames bu/a VA Thoroughbred (VA97B-388) 104 ± VA Price 87 ± VA Nomini 78 ± VA Callao 72 ± VA Doyce* (VA00H-137) 70 ± Average (bu/a) L.S.D..05 (bu/a) C.V. (%) All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments (.) All plots of Nomini at Milan were selectively eaten by deer; the average yield is an adjusted least squares estimate. * Hulless Table 15. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of five six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at six locations in Tennessee during Avg. Yield Test ± Std Err. Moisture Weight Heading Maturity Height Lodging Brand Variety (n=6) (n=6) (n=5) (n=1) (n=5) (n=6) (n=4) bu/a % lbs/bu DAP DAP in. Score VA Thoroughbred (VA97B-388) 104 ± VA Price 87 ± VA Nomini 78 ± VA Callao 72 ± VA Doyce* (VA00H-137) 70 ± All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments Official test weight of No. 1 barley = 48 lbs/bu. * Hulless Heading & Maturity (DAP) = Days after planting Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle
21 Table 16. Mean yields of five six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at five locations (n=10) in Tennessee for two years Avg. Yield ± Std Err. Brand Variety (n=10) Knoxville Springfield Jackson Milan Ames bu/a VA Thoroughbred (VA97B-388) 92 ± VA Price 83 ± VA Nomini 73 ± VA Callao 70 ± VA Doyce* (VA00H-137) 65 ± Average (bu/a) L.S.D..05 (bu/a) C.V. (%) All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments * Hulless Table 17. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of five six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at five locations (n=10) in Tennessee for two years Avg. Yield Test ± Std Err. Moisture Weight Heading Maturity Height Lodging Brand Variety (n=10) (n=10) (n=10) (n=3) (n=8) (n=10) (n=6) bu/a % lbs/bu DAP DAP in. Score VA Thoroughbred (VA97B-388) 92 ± VA Price 83 ± VA Nomini 73 ± VA Callao 70 ± VA Doyce* (VA00H-137) 65 ± All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments Official test weight of No. 1 barley = 48 lbs/bu. * Hulless Heading & Maturity (DAP) = Days after planting Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle
22 Table 18. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of three six-rowed barley varieties evaluated at four locations (n=12) in Tennessee for three years Avg. Yield Test ± Std Err. Moisture Weight Heading Maturity Height Lodging Brand Variety (n=12) Knoxville Springfield Milan Ames (n=12) (n=12) (n=5) (n=9) (n=12) (n=5) bu/a % lbs/bu DAP DAP in. Score VA Price 83 ± VA Callao 74 ± VA Nomini 73 ± Average (bu/a) L.S.D..05 (bu/a) C.V. (%) All yields are adjusted to 13.5% moisture. n = number of environments Official test weight of No. 1 barley = 48 lbs/bu. Heading & Maturity (DAP) = Days after planting Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle
23 Oats Results Yield tests were conducted at the West Tennessee (Jackson) and the Knoxville Experiment Stations during on 21 winter oat varieties/breeding lines. The test at the West TN station was seeded in the fall (Oct. 23, 2003) and the test at Knoxville was seeded in the spring (March 11, 2004). Other experimental details are given in the footnotes of Tables 19 and 20. The growing season for the fall planting was a little more than double that of the spring planting, 234 versus 111 days, respectively. The mean yield of the 21 oat entries following seeding in the fall was approximately three times greater than when the same entries were seeded in the spring (122.5 versus 40.2 bu/a, respectively; Tables 19 and 20). The varieties ranged in yield from 82.2 to bu/a for fall seeding (Table 19) and from 30.7 to 56.2 for spring seeding (Table 20). Test weights were also lower for the spring versus fall seeding (24.9 vs lbs/bu, respectively; Tables 19 and 20). Even with a considerable amount of cold damage to some varieties (see Table 19), their yields were more than double for fall seeding versus spring seeding, for this one year of testing. 23
24 Table 19. Mean yields, agronomic characteristics and winter hardiness ratings of 21 oat breeding lines fall-seeded and evaluated at Jackson, Tennessee in Line Yield (14% Moisture) Moisture at Harvest Test Weight Winter Kill Winter Kill bu/acre % lb/bu FL 9708-P AR AR LA989SBSB-58-B LA989SBS-49-B-S LA966BSB B ACS LA AR LA98002SBS-26-B-S HORIZON AR LA976GBS-22-B-S PLOT SPIKE LA LA966BSB B AR HORIZON LA9533D63-1-C-S SBSB-124-S SBS-64-B-S LA9810SBS LA Mean LSD (0.05) 39.4 NS CV (%) P value < < Planted 10/23/03 No-Till following soybeans applied at planting High soil test P & K 32 oz burndown Harvested 6/14/04 No fungicide or insecticide applied 0.5 oz Harmony applied for weed control 7" Row Spacing 4 replications 24
25 Table 20. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 21 oat breeding lines spring-seeded and evaluated at Knoxville, Tennessee in Line Yield (14% Moisture) Moisture at Harvest Test Weight Maturity Plant Height Lodging bu/acre % lb/bu Days inches 1-5 LA989SBSB-58-B AR Plot Spike LA AR AR LA98002SBS-26-B-S LA LA98002SBS-64-B-S AR Horizon LA976GBS-22-B-S FL 9708-P LA98003SBSB-124-S ACS LA LA989SBS-49-B-S LA966BSB B AR LA9533D63-1-C-S Horizon LA9810SBS LA966BSB B Mean LSD (0.05) NS NS 2.5 NS CV (%) P value < Planted 3/11/04 following a winter wheat cover crop applied at 10/15/03, applied 4/5/04 Medium soil test P, High soil test K 32 oz burndown Harvested 6/29/04 No fungicide or insecticide applied 7" Row Spacing 3 replications 25
Wheat and Barley Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee
Wheat and Barley Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee 2005 Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Richard D. Johnson, Research Associate, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing
More informationWheat and Oat Variety Performance Tests
Research Report 11-01 Wheat and Oat Variety Performance Tests 2010 in Tennessee Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Richard D. Johnson, Research Associate, Agronomic
More informationWheat Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee
Wheat Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee 2012 Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Richard D. Johnson, Research Associate, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations
More informationWheat Tech Agronomy Wheat Variety Performance Test Results
Wheat Tech Agronomy 2013-2014 Wheat Variety Performance Test Results General Information: The 2013-2014 wheat variety performance tests were conducted at three different sites: Adairville, Kentucky; Humboldt,
More informationWheat and Oat Variety Performance Tests
Research Report 12-01 Wheat and Oat Variety Performance Tests 2011 in Tennessee Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Richard D. Johnson, Research Associate, Agronomic
More informationWheat Tech Agronomy Wheat Variety Performance Test Results
2014-2015 Wheat Variety Performance Test Results General Information: The 2014-2015 winter wheat variety performance tests were conducted at three different sites: Auburn, Kentucky; Humboldt, Tennessee;
More information2001 Kentucky Small Grain Variety Trials Experimental Methods Figure 1. Region 2000 Location Cooperator Crop Tested
PR-448 Kentucky Small Grain Variety Trials C.R. Tutt, C.S. Swanson, J. Connelly, D. Call, and D.A. Van Sanford In, Kentucky farmers harvested 21.1 million bushels of soft red winter wheat produced on 340,000
More informationSOYBEAN VARIETY PERFORMANCE TESTS IN TENNESSEE
PRELIMINARY REPORT SOYBEAN VARIETY PERFORMANCE TESTS IN TENNESSEE 2011 RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTERS AND COUNTY STANDARD TESTS Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations
More informationThe 2004 wheat growing season ended with Kentucky farmers
PR-500 2004 Kentucky Small Grain Variety Trials C. Tutt, C.S. Swanson, J. Connelley, R. Green, and D.A. Van Sanford The 2004 wheat growing season ended with Kentucky farmers harvesting 370,000 acres of
More informationSOYBEAN VARIETY PERFORMANCE TESTS IN TENNESSEE
SOYBEAN VARIETY PERFORMANCE TESTS IN TENNESSEE 2014 AGRESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTERS AND COUNTY STANDARD TESTS Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Virginia R. Sykes,
More informationRR12-03 Soybean Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee 2011
University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Field & Commercial Crops UT Extension Publications 7-11-2012 RR12-03 Soybean Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee 2011
More informationWheat Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee
Wheat Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee 2017 Dennis West, Professor, Plant Science Department David Kincer, Research Associate, Plant Science Department Ryan Blair, Extension Area Grains & Cotton
More informationRR Soybean Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee
University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Field & Commercial Crops UT Extension Publications 12-2008 RR09-03-2008 Soybean Variety Performance Tests in Tennessee
More informationVirginia Corn & Small Grain Management. Small Grains in 2007
Virginia Corn & Small Grain Management Small Grains in 2007 Table of Contents Recommended Small Grain Varieties... 1 Barley and Wheat Entries... 3 Introduction... 4 The Season... 4 Section 1: Barley Varieties
More informationSection 4: Wheat Varieties
Section 4: Wheat Varieties 49 Wheat trials were planted in seven-inch rows at Blackstone, Orange, Holland, Painter, and Shenandoah Valley. They were planted in six-inch rows at Blacksburg. They were planted
More informationWheat Tech Agronomy Wheat Variety Performance Test Results General Information: Growing Season:
2017-2018 Wheat Variety Performance Test Results General Information: The 2017-2018 soft red winter wheat variety performance tests were conducted at three different sites: Adairville, Kentucky; Tenton,
More informationTable 1 Location: MILAN EXPERIMENT STATION University of Tennessee
Table 1 Location: MILAN EXPERIMENT STATION Soybean Disease Ratings for Frogeye Leaf Spot, SDS & Stem Canker with Yields Maturity Group V (Late) 2003 Trial ID: 03SBFE5L Investigator: Dr. Melvin Newman Crop
More informationOat. Tifton, Georgia: Oat Grain Performance,
Oat Tifton, Georgia: An oat variety grain trial was planted at this location on September 23, 2015. However, crown rust disease and lodging during the growing season resulted in some very low grain yields
More information2009 Kentucky Small Grain VARIETY PERFORMANCE TEST
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, LEXINGTON, KY, 40546 PR-586 Kentucky Small Grain VARIETY PERFORMANCE TEST B. Bruening, C. Tutt, S. Swanson, J. Connelley,
More informationSMALL GRAIN VARIETIES RECOMMENDED Arranged in Order of Maturity COASTAL PLAIN PIEDMONT WEST OF BLUE RIDGE. Barley. Wheat
Revised 1995 SMALL GRAINS IN 1995 The following are the small grain variety recommendations for Virginia in 1995. The recommendations are based on the agronomic performance in barley and wheat variety
More informationThe 2010 soft red winter wheat growing season ended with
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, LEXINGTON, KY, 40546 PR-604 2010 Kentucky Small Grain Variety Performance Test B. Bruening, C. Tutt, S. Swanson, J. Connelley,
More informationDEPARTMENT OF PLANT SCIENCE & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE COLLEGE PARK, MD (301) MARYLAND SOYBEAN VARIETY TESTS
Information DEPARTMENT OF PLANT SCIENCE & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE COLLEGE PARK, MD 20742 - (301) 405-6244 Agronomy Facts No. 32 MARYLAND SOYBEAN VARIETY TESTS Maryland soybean variety tests are conducted
More informationSMALL GRAIN VARIETIES RECOMMENDED Arranged in Order of Maturity COASTAL PLAIN PIEDMONT WEST OF BLUE RIDGE. Barley. Nomini Nomini Nomini Nomini
Revised 1994 SMALL GRAINS IN 1994 The following are the small grain variety recommendations for Virginia in 1994. The recommendations are based on the agronomic performance in barley and wheat variety
More informationThe 2016 soft red winter wheat growing season ended with.
PR-707 University of Kentucky College of Agriculture, Food and Environment Agricultural Experiment Station 2016 Kentucky Small Grain PERFORMANCE TEST B. Bruening, B. Mijatovic, S. Swanson, J. Connelley,
More informationSMALL GRAIN VARIETIES RECOMMENDED Arranged in Order of Maturity. Barley. Callao Callao Callao Callao. Nomini Nomini Nomini Nomini
Revised 2000 SMALL GRAINS IN 2000 The following are the small grain variety recommendations for Virginia in 2000. The recommendations are based on the agronomic performance in barley and wheat variety
More informationWisconsin winter wheat performance tests: 2012
A3868 Wisconsin winter wheat performance tests: 2012 Shawn Conley, Adam Roth, John Gaska, and Mark Martinka The Wisconsin Winter Wheat Performance Tests are conducted each year to give growers information
More informationSection 5: Wheat Scab Research
67 Section 5: Wheat Scab Research One of the primary research objectives of the Virginia Tech wheat breeding program is to identify and develop cultivars possessing resistance to Fusarium Head Blight ()
More information2012 Kentucky Small Grain VARIETY PERFORMANCE TEST
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, LEXINGTON, KY, 40546 PR-640 2012 Kentucky Small Grain PERFORMANCE TEST B. Bruening, S. Swanson, J. Connelley, G. Olson, and
More information2018 Soybean Variety Performance Test Results
2018 Soybean Variety Performance Test Results Wheat Tech Agronomy Research and Development Division www.wheattech.com 270-586-1776 Data provided by Wheat Tech Agronomy R&D Division 270-586-1776 Table of
More informationFIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY
173 Title: Personnel: Location: Supported By: J.G. Lauer, E. Cullen, P.J. Flannery, and K.D. Kohn Arlington, WI HATCH FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY Corn Rootworm Hybrid Comparison Trial Experiment: 10 Corn
More information2017 Kentucky Small Grain
PR-724 University of Kentucky College of Agriculture, Food and Environment Agricultural Experiment Station 2017 Kentucky Small Grain PERFORMANCE TEST B. Bruening, B. Roberts, S. Swanson, J. Connelley,
More informationArkansas Wheat Cultivar Performance Tests
Arkansas Wheat Cultivar Performance Tests 2016-2017 R.E. Mason R.G. Miller D.E. Moon J.P. Kelley ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION August 2017 Research Series 645 This publication is available on
More informationEvaluation of winter wheat variety performance in off-station trials near Moccasin, Denton, Fort Benton, Moore, and Winifred
PROJECT TITLE: PROJECT LEADER: PROJECT PERSONNEL: Evaluation of winter wheat variety performance in off-station trials near Moccasin, Denton, Fort Benton, Moore, and Winifred D. M. Wichman, Agronomist,
More informationTHE 2016 OHIO SOYBEAN PERFORMANCE TRIALS
THE 2016 OHIO SOYBEAN PERFORMANCE TRIALS J.D. Bethel, Matthew Hankinson, John McCormick, and Laura Lindsey Department of Horticulture and Crop Science Ohio State University Extension and OARDC INTRODUCTION
More informationArkansas Wheat Cultivar Performance Tests R.E. Mason, R.G. Miller, J.P. Kelley, and E.A. Milus
Arkansas Wheat Cultivar Performance Tests 2011-2012 R.E. Mason, R.G. Miller, J.P. Kelley, and E.A. Milus ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION September 2012 Research Series 603 This publication is
More informationThe 2017 University of Delaware Variety Trial Notes. Victor M. Green
The 2017 University of Delaware Variety Trial Notes Victor M. Green 302-275-1445 vmgreen@udel.edu Special thanks and appreciation is extended to the following people for whom this research would not have
More informationSMALL GRAIN VARIETIES RECOMMENDED Arranged in Order of Maturity COASTAL PLAIN PIEDMONT WEST OF BLUE RIDGE. Barley. Wheat
Revised 1997 SMALL GRAINS IN 1997 The following are the small grain variety recommendations for Virginia in 1997. The recommendations are based on the agronomic performance in barley and wheat variety
More informationFIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY
111 Title: Corn - Soybean - Wheat Response to Rotation: Nrate Experiment: 09CSW Trial ID: 5950 Year: 2015 Personnel: Joe Lauer, Thierno Diallo, Kent Kohn, Location: Supported By: Site Information Field:
More informationCorn Grain Hybrid Tests in Tennessee
Research Report 11-02 Corn Grain Hybrid Tests in Tennessee 2010 Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Richard D. Johnson, Research Associate, Agronomic Crop Variety
More informationDEPARTMENT OF PLANT SCIENCE & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
Information DEPARTMENT OF PLANT SCIENCE & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE COLLEGE PARK, MD 20742 - (301) 405-6244 MARYLAND SOYBEAN VARIETY TESTS Maryland soybean variety tests are conducted each year by the Maryland
More information2017 Evaluation of Field Corn Varieties, Jay, Florida
2017 Evaluation of Field Corn Varieties, Jay, Florida Libbie Johnson and Barry Brecke This report includes the summary of the 2017 field corn small plot replicated variety trial (OVT) and large plot demonstration
More informationVariety Trial Results for 2018 and Selection Guide
NDSU EXTENSION A1105-18 North Dakota Flax Variety Trial Results for 2018 and Selection Guide Hans Kandel (NDSU Main Station); Greg Endres, Mike Ostlie, Blaine Schatz and Steve Zwinger (Carrington Research
More informationOat. Tifton, Georgia: Oat Grain Performance, Yield 1
Oat Tifton, Georgia: Average Average Rank Wt Ht Lodg. Survival Date Horizon 474 117.5 105.5 7 135.3 33.4 47 31. 03/25 Horizon 321 111.5 115.9 6 137.9 33.2 45 20. 03/30 TAMO 405 100.2 115.3 8 132.3 31.6
More informationSOYBEAN PERFORMANCE IN OREGON IN 1999
SOYBEAN PERFORMANCE IN OREGON IN 1999 Erik B.G. Feibert, Clinton C. Shock, Peter Sexton, Lamont D. Saunders, and Rhonda Bafus Malheur Experiment Station Oregon State University Ontario, Oregon Introduction
More informationDiscussion of barley varieties and summary of barley management practices for the harvest season
Small Grains in 2017 Table of Contents Recommended Small Grain Varieties... 1 Barley and Wheat Entries... 4 Introduction... 6 The Season... 6 Section 1: Barley Varieties Discussion of barley varieties
More informationEvaluations of Corn Hybrids in Alabama, 2013
Evaluations of Corn Hybrids in Alabama, 2013 Agronomy and Soils Departmental Series No. 331 Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station William Batchelor, Director Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, November
More informationFIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY
156 FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY Title: The Ability of Nitrification Inhibitor (SuperU) ratios to Increase Corn Grain Yield in WI Soils. Experiment: 12Fertilizer Trial ID: 5932 Year: 2014 Personnel: Location:
More informationSoybean Variety Performance Test Results. Wheat Tech Research & Development Division
2015 Soybean Variety Performance Test Results Wheat Tech Research & Development Division Table of Contents General & Growing Season Information. 1 Growing Season Information & Data Interpretation. 2 Acknowledgements.
More informationTifton, Georgia: Oat Grain Performance, Yield 1
Tifton, Georgia: Average Average Rank Wt Ht Lodg. Survival Date Horizon 201 139.9 132.2 1 155.9 30.5 54 0 100 04/11 Horizon 270 128.8 119.4 4 138.0 32.2 42 0 100 04/13 Plot Spike LA9339 124.4 115.5 9 127.3
More informationSequential Preemergence/Postemergence Herbicide Systems in Soybean for the Control of Giant Ragweed in Southeastern Minnesota in 2015.
Sequential Preemergence/Postemergence Herbicide Systems in Soybean for the Control of Giant Ragweed in Southeastern Minnesota in 2015. Breitenbach, Fritz R., Lisa M. Behnken, Ellen Sheehan, and Brent Breitenbach
More informationKentucky Silage Corn Hybrid Performance Report: 2010
Kentucky Silage Corn Hybrid Performance Report: 2010 Table 1. Corn Hybrid Performance for Silage, Combined Sites (Adair and Mason counties), KY, 2010 Beck's 5675 HXR 22.9 3380 27000 0.81 0.55 7.4 21 37
More informationArkansas Soybean Performance Tests
Arkansas Soybean Performance Tests 2006 D.G. Dombek R.D. Bond L. Coffee I.L. Eldridge ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Division of Agriculture University of Arkansas System December 2006 Research
More information2016 South Dakota Spring Wheat Variety Trial Results
Jonathan Kleinjan SDSU Extension Crop Performance Testing (CPT) Director Chris Graham SDSU Extension Agronomist, Rapid City Kevin Kirby Ag Research Manager, Brookings Bruce Swan Ag Research Manager, Rapid
More informationOat. Tifton, Georgia: Oat Grain Performance, Data 2-Year Average 3 Rank Yield 1 Wt Ht Lodg.
Oat Brand-Variety Tifton, Georgia: 2 Test 3 Rank Horizon 201 104.5 100.5 16 71.0 27.2 46 14 03/31 SS 76-50 100.4 96.6 9 79.9 28.0 37 3 04/05 Gerard 224 96.9 97.8 8 81.1 29.8 42 1 04/04 Horizon 306 94.5
More informationCorn Hybrid Performance Test Results. Wheat Tech Research and Development Division
2015 Corn Hybrid Performance Test Results Wheat Tech Research and Development Division Table of Contents General & Growing Season Information. 1 Data Interpretation & Acknowledgements. 2 Logan County (Adairville,
More informationTable 2. Evaluation of herbicide systems to control giant ragweed in soybeans at Rochester, MN in Pest Code AMBTR YIELD Pest Name Giant ragweed
Giant Ragweed Control in Soybean - Demonstration of the Advantages of a Full Spectrum Residual Herbicide Program in Soybean at Rochester, Minnesota in 2016. Breitenbach, Fritz R., Lisa M. Behnken, Annette
More informationComparisons of PRE/POST Weed Control Programs in Field Corn at Rochester, MN in 2015
Comparisons of PRE/POST Weed Control Programs in Field Corn at Rochester, MN in 2015 Behnken, Lisa M., Fritz R. Breitenbach, Dillon Welter and Brent Breitenbach The objective of this trial was to evaluate
More information2015 Evaluation of Field Corn Varieties, Jay, Florida
2015 Evaluation of Field Corn Varieties, Jay, Florida Libbie Johnson and Barry Brecke This report includes the summary of the 2015 field corn small plot replicated variety trial (OVT) and large plot demonstration
More informationWHEAT PERFORMANCE IN ILLINOIS TRIALS 2018
WHEAT PERFORMANCE IN ILLINOIS TRIALS 2018 Crop Sciences Special Report 2018-01 Department of Crop Sciences University of Illinois July 2018 WHEAT PERFORMANCE IN ILLINOIS TRIALS - 2018 Crop Sciences Special
More informationControl of Little Barley in No-Till Wheat.
399 Control of Little Barley in No-Till Wheat. Project Code: 03-2B-E130 Location: Belleville Research Center Investigator: Bryan Young, Assistant Professor, Southern Illinois University City State Zip
More informationTrial seeding dates, locations, average yields, and average test weights are as follows:
Irrigated Wheat Grain Variety Trial Results, Southwest South Plains 2005-2009 Five-Year Results, Gaines-Yoakum Cos., Texas Calvin Trostle, Texas AgriLife Extension Service agronomist, Lubbock (806) 746-6101,
More information2013 Evaluation of In-Furrow and Foliar Fungicides for Disease Control in Peanut in Jay, Florida 1
PP310 2013 Evaluation of In-Furrow and Foliar Fungicides for Disease Control in Peanut in Jay, Florida 1 Darcy E. P. Telenko, John Atkins, Nick Dufault, 2 This report includes a summary of the 2013 in-furrow
More informationOff-station winter wheat cultivar performance on fallow in central Montana. D.M. Wichman CARC Research Agronomist, Moccasin, Montana.
Project Title: Off-station winter wheat cultivar performance on fallow in central Montana. Project Leader: D.M. Wichman CARC Research Agronomist, Moccasin, Montana. Project Personnel: P.L. Bruckner MAES
More information2017 Soybean Variety Performance Test Results
2017 Soybean Variety Performance Test Results Wheat Tech Agronomy Research and Development Division www.wheattech.com 270-586-1776 Data provided by Wheat Tech Agronomy R&D Division 270-586-1776 Table of
More informationSpring Wheat Variety Screening in the Klamath Basin Donald R. Clark, Jim E. Smith, and Greg Chilcote 1 A
Spring Wheat Variety Screening in the Klamath Basin Donald R. Clark, Jim E. Smith, and Greg Chilcote 1 A bstract Spring wheat breeding lines from the Oregon State University (OSU) and other regional breeding
More informationPROJECT TITLE: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: CONTRIBUTORS: 2018 STATEWIDE DURUM VARIETY TRIALS
PROJECT TITLE: 2018 STATEWIDE DURUM VARIETY TRIALS PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: Dr. Michael Giroux, MSU-Bozeman, MT Email: mgiroux@montana.edu Phone: (406) 994-7877 Andy Hogg, MSU-Bozeman, MT Email: ahogg@montana.edu
More informationFIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY
24 Title: Personnel: Location: Supported By: Joe Lauer, Kent Kohn, Thierno Diallo Arlington, WI HATCH FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY Corn Hybrid Growth and Development Experiment: 01GD Trial ID: 6048 Year: 2016
More informationPerformance of Cotton Varieties in 1986
University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Research Reports AgResearch 2-1987 Performance of Cotton Varieties in 1986 University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment
More informationArkansas Soybean. Performance Tests. R.D. Bond J.A. Still D.G. Dombek. ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION December 2015 Research Series 630
Arkansas Soybean 2015 Performance Tests R.D. Bond J.A. Still D.G. Dombek ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION December 2015 Research Series 630 This publication is available on the internet at: http://arkansasagnews.uark.edu/1356.htm
More informationCOTTON. Mississippi VARIETY TRIALS, Information Bulletin 372 August Mississippi Agricultural & Forestry Experiment Station
Information Bulletin 372 August 2000 Mississippi COTTON VARIETY TRIALS, 1999 Vance H. Watson, Director Mississippi Agricultural & Forestry Experiment Station J. Charles Lee, President Mississippi State
More informationVirginia Small Grain Forage Variety Testing Report: Long-Term Summary ( )
publication 48-09 Virginia Small Grain Forage Variety Testing Report: Long-Term Summary (994-2004) www.ext.vt.edu Produced by Communications and Marketing, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Virginia
More informationFIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY
92 Personnel: Location: Supported By: J.G. Lauer, K.D. Kohn and T.H. Diallo Arlington, WI Valent BioSciences FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY Title: Valent BioSciences - Root Growth Promoter Trial Experiment:
More informationTest Weight. Plant Height**
Introduction In ten short years sunflowers have become an important crop in eastern Colorado with acreage surpassing a record 300,000 acres in 1999 and a crop value of over $30 million. Statewide, sunflowers
More informationSmall Grains in 2018
Small Grains in 2018 2018 Virginia Tech SPES-46NP Virginia Cooperative Extension programs and employment are open to all, regardless of age, color, disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression,
More information2014 Soybean Performance Tests
Arkansas 2014 Soybean Performance Tests R.D Bond D.G. Dombek J.A. Still ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION December 2014 Research Series 622 This publication is available on the internet at: http://arkansasagnews.uark.edu/1356.htm
More informationLouisiana State University Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management. DuPont K4 Spring Timing Test
Louisiana State University Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management DuPont K4 Spring Timing Test Experiment number...: 03SC11JG Location...: St. Gabriel Research Station St. Gabriel, LA Experimental
More informationCorn Grain Hybrid Tests in Tennessee
Corn Grain Hybrid Tests in Tennessee 2016 Virginia R. Sykes, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Ryan H. Blair. Extension Area Specialist, Grain Crops & Cotton Angela Thompson
More informationTriticale. Tifton, Georgia: Triticale Grain Performance, Data 3-Year Average. Head Date bu/acre Wt Ht Lodg.
Triticale Tifton, Georgia: Rank Test Trical 342 98.5 107.5 4 137.5. 50 0 100 04/02 Sunland 91.3 107.0 2 138.0. 43 0 100 04/01 Trical 314 89.7 105.4 3 137.5. 36 0 100 03/30 Fleming* 70.4 79.3 8 101.5. 33
More informationField Calibration of Woodruff, Mehlich and Sikora Buffer Tests for Determining Lime Requirement for Missouri soils
Field Calibration of Woodruff, Mehlich and Sikora Buffer Tests for Determining Lime Requirement for Missouri soils Manjula Nathan, Robert Kallenbach, Division of Plant Sciences, University of Missouri
More informationPB 1865 SOYBEAN VARIETY TESTS IN TENNESSEE 2017
PB 1865 SOYBEAN VARIETY TESTS IN TENNESSEE 2017 Soybean Variety Tests in Tennessee 2017 Virginia Sykes, Assistant Professor, Variety Testing Coordinator and Agroecology Specialist Alison Willette, Research
More informationHard Red Spring Wheat J.A. Anderson, G.L. Linkert and J.J. Wiersma
Hard Red Spring Wheat J.A. Anderson, G.L. Linkert and J.J. Wiersma Varietal Trials Results, January 2006 Spring wheat varieties are compared in trial plots at Waseca, Lamberton, Morris, Crookston, Stephen,
More informationArkansas. Performance Tests 2001
Arkansas Performance Tests 2001 D.G. Dombek D.K. Ahrent R.D. Bond I.L. Eldridge ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Division of Agriculture University of Arkansas December 2001 Research Series 489
More informationSection 5: Wheat Scab Research
Section 5: Wheat Scab Research One of the primary research objectives of the Virginia Tech wheat breeding program is to identify and develop cultivars possessing resistance to Fusarium Head Blight (FHB)
More informationTifton, Georgia: Oat Grain Performance,
Oat Tifton, Georgia: Brand-Variety 2 2 Horizon 270 156.9 119.6 109.5 34.8 47 6 03/25 SCLA 0100214 154.3.. 33.2 42 0 04/04 Horizon 720 153.4.. 33.4 52 6 04/04 LA07007SBSBSB-18 150.0.. 34.9 43 0 03/23 NC12-3578
More information2010 NEW YORK STATE SOYBEAN VARIETY YIELD TESTS. William J. Cox, Phil Atkins, and Mike Davis Dep. of Crop and Soil Sciences
Dep. of Crop and Soil Sciences Extension Series No. E-10-2 November, 2010 2010 NEW YORK STATE SOYBEAN VARIETY YIELD TESTS William J. Cox, Phil Atkins, and Mike Davis Dep. of Crop and Soil Sciences NYS
More informationFIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY
132 Title: Personnel: Location: Supported By: J. G. Lauer, J.M. Gaska, K. D. Kohn, T.H. Diallo Arlington, WI HATCH FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY Tillage in Corn and Soybean Production Systems Experiment: 17Tillage
More informationPERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL DENT CORN HYBRIDS IN INDIANA, 2001
November 2001 Bulletin No. B-806 PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL DENT CORN HYBRIDS IN INDIANA, 2001 Department of Agronomy Agricultural Research Programs Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana TABLE OF CONTENTS
More information2018 Corn Hybrid Performance Trial Results WHEAT TECH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
2018 Corn Hybrid Performance Trial Results WHEAT TECH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION Table of Contents General, Growing Season Information, and Data interpretation. 1 & 2 Acknowledgements. 3 Caldwell
More informationCORN GRAIN HYBRID TESTS IN TENNESSEE 2018 PB 1864
CORN GRAIN HYBRID TESTS IN TENNESSEE 2018 PB 1864 Corn Grain Tests in Tennessee 2018 Virginia Sykes, Assistant Professor, Variety Testing Coordinator and Agroecology Specialist Ryan Blair, Extension Area
More informationEvaluation of spring wheat cultivar performance under continuous-crop and crop-crop-fallow systems in central Montana
Project Title: Evaluation of spring wheat cultivar performance under continuous-crop and crop-crop-fallow systems in central Montana Project Leader: D. M. Wichman Research Agronomist, Moccasin, MT Project
More informationArkansas Soybean. Performance Tests. R.D. Bond J.A. Still D.G. Dombek. ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION December 2016 Research Series 640
Arkansas Soybean 2016 Performance Tests R.D. Bond J.A. Still D.G. Dombek ARKANSAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION December 2016 Research Series 640 This publication is available on the internet at: http://arkansasagnews.uark.edu/1356.htm
More informationGeorgetown Dagsboro* Marydel** Middletown***
Georgetown Dagsboro* Marydel** Middletown*** Rainfall Avg temp Rainfall Avg temp Rainfall Avg temp Rainfall Avg temp May 2.47 67.4 1.24 66.5 2.56 66.3 1.59 67.4 June 5.9 73.5 6.58 73.1 4.45 72.8 12.24
More informationVIRGINIA SOYBEAN PERFORMANCE TESTS 2009
VIRGINIA SOYBEAN PERFORMANCE TESTS 2009 David L. Holshouser, Michael Ellis, Patsy Lewis, & Ed Seymore Tidewater Agricultural Research and Extension Center 6321 Holland Road Suffolk, VA 23437 (757) 657
More informationBreitenbach, Fritz R., Lisa M. Behnken, Jeffrey L. Gunsolus, Reed Searcy, and Jared Liebenow
Managing Glyphosate (Group-9) and ALS (Group-2) Resistant Common Waterhemp with Different Systems and Herbicide Rates in LibertyLink Soybean in S Minnesota in 2016. Breitenbach, Fritz R., Lisa M. Behnken,
More informationDEPARTMENT OF PLANT SCIENCE & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE COLLEGE PARK, MD (301) MARYLAND SOYBEAN VARIETY TESTS
Information DEPARTMENT OF PLANT SCIENCE & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE COLLEGE PARK, MD 20742 - (301) 405-6244 Agronomy Facts No. 32 MARYLAND SOYBEAN VARIETY TESTS Maryland soybean variety tests are conducted
More information2008 Performance of spring wheat varieties in central Montana. By Dave Wichman
2008 Performance of spring wheat varieties in central Montana. By Dave Wichman 2008 will be remembered as a severe sawfly year in many wheat growing areas of Montana. There were even instances of severe
More informationVirginia Soybean Variety Evaluation Tests 2004
Virginia Soybean Evaluation Tests 2004 Virginia Soybean Evaluation Tests 2004 David L. Holshouser, Soybean Specialist, Virginia Tech Michael Ellis, Agricultural Technician, Virginia Tech Patsy Lewis,
More informationVarietal Trials Results
Varietal Trials Results January 2008 Wheat, Hard Red Spring Jim Anderson, Jochum Wiersma, Gary Linkert, Catherine Springer and Susan Reynolds differ for their response to each of those diseases, the rating
More informationWe would like to offer our sincere appreciation to the Mississippi Rice Promotion Board for
Mississippi Variety Trials, 2011 Dwight G. Kanter, Research Professor Timothy W. Walker, Associate Agronomist Nathan W. Buehring, Extension Specialist Walter L. Solomon, Research Associate II Leland S.
More informationCRW/Standard Efficacy Final Report 5 December 2011
1 CRW/Standard Efficacy Final Report 5 December 211 TEST 1 of 2 Test Name and Location: Corn Rootworm Small Plot Assay, Throckmorton-Purdue Agricultural Center, Lafayette, IN. Cooperator: Christian Krupke/Larry
More information